EDITOR'S NOTE: This article was revised at 3:30 p.m. Oct. 3 to reflect the legal body which will now hear the case.

Colleen M. O'Toole has misrepresented herself on campaign literature in the 11th District Court of Appeals judicial race, according to a three-member disciplinary panel.

O'Toole, a former judge for the 11th District, is running against incumbent Judge Mary Jane Trapp Nov. 6.

O'Toole was an appellate court judge from 2005 to 2011. She lost in the Republican primary in 2010 to Lake County Common Pleas Judge Eugene Lucci.

However, O'Toole did not make it clear she was no longer on the bench in her advertisements, the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court of Ohio concluded Monday.

According to a complaint filed by James Davis:

* O'Toole's resume distributed to the Ashtabula County Republican Party contains a photograph of her in what appears to be a judicial robe, creating "the false impression of being a current judge."

* O'Toole's website, otooleforjudge.com, contains a statement that she was "elected to the Eleventh District Court of Appeals in 2004."

* After she lost her re-election bid, O'Toole wore a gold and black name plate badge which reads, "Colleen Mary O'Toole Judge 11th District Court of Appeals."

The Board decided Davis did not prove the allegations about the robe and voted to dismiss that charge.

However, they found O'Toole's website and badge are part of an effort to portray herself as an incumbent judge.

"The panel finds a reasonable person would be deceived or mislead into believing Respondent is currently serving on the Eleventh District Court of Appeals," according to the Board's opinion.

The panel has recommended O'Toole be ordered to include the date her service as judge ended and to remove any reference to herself as "Judge O'Toole" on her website. Board members also recommend she be ordered to cease and desist from wearing the name badge that identifies her as a judge.

In addition, the panel recommends O'Toole be fined $1,000 and the cost of the proceedings, plus pay Davis $2,500 and his attorney fees.

A five-judge commission has now been appointed to review the matter.

O'Toole called the filing a politically-motivated move from "the wardrobe police."

She said she did not intentionally mislead anyone.

"I think I'm going to be vindicated because of the First Amendment and case law," O'Toole said. "This is protected stuff. I do not feel it's a violation. Now I have to spend large amounts of money defending myself."